Comments on: Were We All Stood Up On Finding Bigfoot?http://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/sylvanic2012/
for Bigfoot, Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents and MoreSat, 01 Aug 2015 06:00:17 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.3By: hff135http://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/sylvanic2012/comment-page-1/#comment-76320
Wed, 25 Jan 2012 22:43:15 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=50098#comment-76320I’ve been to one of Todd Standing’s presentations and I’ve seen his movie. It’s definitely a “fictional short film”. The acting and production values are very poor. It doesn’t come off like a documentary at all.
]]>By: DWAhttp://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/sylvanic2012/comment-page-1/#comment-76317
Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:11:10 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=50098#comment-76317nnnslogan:

“The BFRO does not have the best reputation among the bigfoot research community in the first place. The one thing you could say in its favor is that they have an excellent web site with a well constructed database.”

That’s a critical thing to point out. Those who have lost all respect for the BFRO’s work as a result of “Finding Bigfoot” risk tossing the baby out with the bath water. The guys who have no idea how to address a TV show on this topic from a scientific perspective could be the exact very same guys who are maintaining a database that is a critical evidence linchpin. The two endeavors are completely separate. One can set up an excellent data reservoir and still not have a good grasp on how to bring science to the topic. The database is populated by reports from everyday people, investigated by curators having no apparent interest in 15 Minutes, and not by data entered personally by Bobo Fay.

“At an organization the BFRO has a reputation for fouling research efforts as many sites, and spoiling opportunities to obtain conclusive evidence. Supposedly the TBRC was approached before the BFRO about doing this show, and the TBRC turned it down.”

TBRC shows how science-based organizations respond to circus-sideshow opportunities. They truly are science-based; they don’t invite the public on their research forays, treat evidence with the proper protocols, and don’t state as true stuff that isn’t confirmed yet. Anyone who thinks this is a big snipe hunt should spend time – a lot of it – on the TBRC website.

In fact, after it’s pointed out, the skeletal structure of the stories are uncannily similar.

And the difference is one person is praised and the other is criticized by the same people.

I’ll also add that it’s sad that Todd Standing is, I believe, one of two people that Finding Bigfoot has doubted. If Todd watches the show, he’s gotta feel small about being one of two people who have faked/lied to Finding Bigfoot.

The assumptions in your comment set up a reality that is only your opinion, not fact.

]]>By: loopstheloophttp://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/sylvanic2012/comment-page-1/#comment-76307
Tue, 24 Jan 2012 22:24:48 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=50098#comment-76307In fairness, ALL the footage of this cryptid are staged fakes… from Freeman to Patterson-Gimlin. So why discriminate against this ‘Sylvanic’ chap… he’s just another chap who wishes to cash in on the rubes. You beatify some opportunistic tricksters, while pillorying others! Get consistent, folks!
]]>By: nnnsloganhttp://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/sylvanic2012/comment-page-1/#comment-76306
Tue, 24 Jan 2012 20:34:58 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=50098#comment-76306Whether something smells fishy or not, every extraordinary claim must be explored with the same unbiased eye. You can’t just decide someone is a hoaxer until you have conclusive evidence of the hoax, just like you can’t claim the existence of Sasquatch until conclusive evidence is provided. How we “feel” about a person or an allegation is not proof.

Considering the fact that this television show has wasted considerable air time on bad jokes and ridiculous antics from a man calling himself “Bobo” I don’t know why anyone should take it seriously, even if it has visited some legitimate encounter sites. The BFRO does not have the best reputation among the bigfoot research community in the first place. The one thing you could say in its favor is that they have an excellent web site with a well constructed database. At an organization the BFRO has a reputation for fouling research efforts as many sites, and spoiling opportunities to obtain conclusive evidence. Supposedly the TBRC was approached before the BFRO about doing this show, and the TBRC turned it down.

Standing will have his opportunities to prove his claims. If he turns out to be a hoaxer he will be exposed, and all the CGI in the world won’t shield him from scrutiny. Perhaps this is another hoax funded by zealous atheist stage magicians like The Amazing Randi (anyone ever see him actually do a trick?) or Penn and Teller. Time will tell.

]]>By: mandorshttp://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/sylvanic2012/comment-page-1/#comment-76303
Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:14:33 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=50098#comment-76303Loren, my only point is that attacking character should not be a basis of scientific evaluation of anything. Comparing Patterson and Standing may be apples and oranges, but it’s still the same subject.

When I watched the History Channel’s roundtable on the PG film, I was shocked that the only criticism of the film was Patterson himself–that he was a poor man, of questionable background, running low on money. There was no direct rebuttal to Dr. Meldrum’s anatomical arguments about how it could not be a man in a suit, other than “Patterson was a bad guy, so it had to be a fake,” and “it looks like a suit to me.” That’s not science. Just as saying that Todd Standing, or Matt Moneymaker or Tom Biscardi or anybody for that matter, are in it for the money or might have done questionable things, so therefore nothing they produce is reliable.

Your analysis of the demise of MonsterQuest was spot on, however, and I suspect that fall might have been due to the real viewpoints of the producers, who I would bet see the entire field of cryptozoology as nothing but a sideshow.

]]>By: etheralhttp://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/sylvanic2012/comment-page-1/#comment-76301
Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:12:07 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=50098#comment-76301From my perspective, it would appear that Todd is Standing in something that doesn’t smell so good. Mostly it came from his own mouth.

I bet he’s happy though, he got his 10 minutes of fame which will inspire him to take his “craft” to the next level. The other problem I have at this point with Finding Bigfoot is that almost every sound they hear is a squatch. I’m fairly sure that’s due to the edits of the producers but if every sound made in the woods was a squatch, I believe it would be a lot easier to find one of these things.

All in all, it’s TV but holds about as much water as a shattered glass.

]]>By: Loren Colemanhttp://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/sylvanic2012/comment-page-1/#comment-76300
Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:08:02 +0000http://cryptomundo.com/?p=50098#comment-76300Mandors, sir, using the name of Patterson in alignment with Standing is engaging in apples and oranges, a false analogy. I respectfully disagree with the logic and comparative analysis of your comment.

Besides, an actual greater point of mine was about the eventual subject direction of cryptozoology reality television series.

After all the character assassination aimed at Roger Patterson to disprove his film, I’d think we’d tread a little more lightly when it come to people like Standing. Granted, much of his footage is dubious at best, but that doesn’t mean all of it is. I am not, nor trying to be, a Sylvanic apologist, but it seems–similar to Patterson–Standing could have been preparing to make a film in 2005, thus posting ads, then in 2006 stumble across real creatures, eventually leading to some actual footage. Though, not the video that looks like Ewoks–that’s horrible.

I like DWA’s Tufte quote, but I’d add “show us the video” to it, as well. Just show the films. They are part of the data after all. Then, we all can decide.